e0y2e3 wrote:Oh and Tannehill is going to go high enough to prove that GMs are still stoopid about QBs. See also Blaine Gabbert, Locker, etc all going way too high.

That is why you go get RG3, DUH

The stupid part isn't drafting those guys that high. It is waiting to long to cut bait once they prove they are not worthy. You don't get the option of when you get to draft someone, because you are where you are. If you need a QB and there is one that is worthy of going anywhere before you pick again, you should take him. But you only get 2 years before I cut bait on ya.

I'm just being a smartass, but I see QB value trending upward, not down, for at least the next 10 years, so I'm not sure waiting it out is the strategy I'd take. Especially now that you dont have to dump 80 mil into that roll of the dice.

Its a no brainer these days to take your chances if you see the QB prospect as Elite IMO.

JCoz wrote:I'm just being a smartass, but I see QB value trending upward, not down, for at least the next 10 years, so I'm not sure waiting it out is the strategy I'd take. Especially now that you dont have to dump 80 mil into that roll of the dice.

Its a no brainer these days to take your chances if you see the QB prospect as Elite IMO.

SD:

nailed it .

Cash is King the economic dynamic is it costs more not to properly invest in a top flight QB now .

You devalue your franchise disenfranchise your fan base lose sales in jerseys and stadium revenues and have no relevance as a franchise .

grabbing a QB high when you don't have one is no longer a gamble , but damn near an economic necessity.

e0y2e3 wrote:Oh and Tannehill is going to go high enough to prove that GMs are still stoopid about QBs. See also Blaine Gabbert, Locker, etc all going way too high.

That is why you go get RG3, DUH

^^THIS. broadly speaking, dead on. On Tannehill, I mean, are people fucking kidding themselves? EVERY tight A&M game, he choked or, at best, underperformed in the clutch. And he's "franchise QB" material?

So how are you going to feel when Tannehill ends up a member of your 2012 Cleveland Browns?

He's got more chance of being elite/franchise than Colt. I personally don't like him all that well, and my excitement level would be low, but I'll give him at least as long as Colt has had before crying and wailing and feeling sorry for myself.

e0y2e3 wrote:Oh and Tannehill is going to go high enough to prove that GMs are still stoopid about QBs. See also Blaine Gabbert, Locker, etc all going way too high.

That is why you go get RG3, DUH

^^THIS. broadly speaking, dead on. On Tannehill, I mean, are people fucking kidding themselves? EVERY tight A&M game, he choked or, at best, underperformed in the clutch. And he's "franchise QB" material?

So how are you going to feel when Tannehill ends up a member of your 2012 Cleveland Browns?

He's got more chance of being elite/franchise than Colt. I personally don't like him all that well, and my excitement level would be low, but I'll give him at least as long as Colt has had before crying and wailing and feeling sorry for myself.

I dont see how you could even go that far Hiko, and I'm not saying that in defense of Colt.

Tannehill's resume looks like S-H-I-T when it comes to NFL QB prospects.

Can ANYONE find franchise QB with the background he has coming into the league?

I'd bet not.

Flacco had a better resume as the guy coming out of Deleware because he couldn't beat out Tyler Palko for PT.

Hikohadon wrote:He's got more chance of being elite/franchise than Colt. I personally don't like him all that well, and my excitement level would be low, but I'll give him at least as long as Colt has had before crying and wailing and feeling sorry for myself.

I dont see how you could even go that far Hiko, and I'm not saying that in defense of Colt.

Tannehill's resume looks like S-H-I-T when it comes to NFL QB prospects.

Can ANYONE find franchise QB with the background he has coming into the league?

I'd bet not.

Flacco had a better resume as the guy coming out of Deleware because he couldn't beat out Tyler Palko for PT.

Hikohadon wrote:He's got more chance of being elite/franchise than Colt. I personally don't like him all that well, and my excitement level would be low, but I'll give him at least as long as Colt has had before crying and wailing and feeling sorry for myself.

I dont see how you could even go that far Hiko, and I'm not saying that in defense of Colt.

Tannehill's resume looks like S-H-I-T when it comes to NFL QB prospects.

Can ANYONE find franchise QB with the background he has coming into the league?

I'd bet not.

Flacco had a better resume as the guy coming out of Deleware because he couldn't beat out Tyler Palko for PT.

I'm only speaking from a ceiling standpoint - Tannehill has a lot more physical skills than Colt, a much higher ceiling.

He might also have a lower floor, which is scary.

But I haven't seen a helluva lot of the guy, so I'd be forced to reserve judgement until he played some NFL downs. It's not like they'd be replacing a competent alternative.

Fair enough.

I probably oversold the poor resume bit, despite being mistaken for a WR for his first 2.5 years at A&M, he STILL managed to attempt almost twice as many passes as Mark Sanchez, albiet in the French 12, as JB likes to say.

e0y2e3 wrote:Oh and Tannehill is going to go high enough to prove that GMs are still stoopid about QBs. See also Blaine Gabbert, Locker, etc all going way too high.

That is why you go get RG3, DUH

^^THIS. broadly speaking, dead on. On Tannehill, I mean, are people fucking kidding themselves? EVERY tight A&M game, he choked or, at best, underperformed in the clutch. And he's "franchise QB" material?

So how are you going to feel when Tannehill ends up a member of your 2012 Cleveland Browns?

He's got more chance of being elite/franchise than Colt. I personally don't like him all that well, and my excitement level would be low, but I'll give him at least as long as Colt has had before crying and wailing and feeling sorry for myself.

I dont see how you could even go that far Hiko, and I'm not saying that in defense of Colt.

Tannehill's resume looks like S-H-I-T when it comes to NFL QB prospects.

Can ANYONE find franchise QB with the background he has coming into the league?

I'd bet not.

Flacco had a better resume as the guy coming out of Deleware because he couldn't beat out Tyler Palko for PT.

Not advocating, not endorsing, not a fan. Just saying watch what happens. FA will tell us much much more, but as of today I would bet

The Browns select a QB in the 2012 NFL Draft

That QB is not named RGIII

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

<------thinks that is a bit disturbing - either some type of mind trick or ^^^^^^^^^ acts as Holmgren's caddy and slushie holder during charity golf events

ETA<------has just realized that HooDoo is also represented by Bob LaMonte, as no other possible answer exists

HA!

CleSportsTruth wrote:That's great and all, but ummmm, is he ANY GOOD?

I sure as F don't know. He has some attractive qualities. He has a lot of upside. He'd make sense in the latter half of the first round. (More sense, IMO, than two 1s, a 2, and more for RG3) And if that's where we get him, I'm on board with that roll of the dice.

<------thinks that is a bit disturbing - either some type of mind trick or ^^^^^^^^^ acts as Holmgren's caddy and slushie holder during charity golf events

ETA<------has just realized that HooDoo is also represented by Bob LaMonte, as no other possible answer exists

HA!

CleSportsTruth wrote:That's great and all, but ummmm, is he ANY GOOD?

I sure as F don't know. He has some attractive qualities. He has a lot of upside. He'd make sense in the latter half of the first round. (More sense, IMO, than two 1s, a 2, and more for RG3) And if that's where we get him, I'm on board with that roll of the dice.

So, you'll take the lesser/less developed QB b/c of draft picks? A much greater unknown than RGIII? In today's NFL? :billengvall: Here's your sign. :billengvall:

B/c any first-rounder at QB better be franchise material. Is Tannehill that guy? Don't see it.